Posted by: @dominus

↑

@stewart-meadows Anyways, just like I said, the discussion about this topic is pointless because you relate in some shape or form to Croats and are also providing Croatian sources which makes this bias.

I provided Croatian as well as non-Croatian sources. For example, I quoted from Istarski razvod, which is an extremely important medevial legal document that was created by the authorites in Istria which were Germanic and Romance. That's why it was written in three languages: Latin, German and Croatian.

So here we have the authorities of the time, Germanic and Romance ones, that acknowledge the Croats as a people/ethnic group with their own language, and this language is explicitly referred to as "Croatian" (which would be hrvatski or hrvacki in Croatian).

One literally couldn't ask for better proof than this, and yet you absurdely and dishonestly dismiss it. So yeah, I guess this discussion is pointless since I'm dealing with somebody who refuses to accept the basic and obvious fact that the Croatian people actually exists.

Posted by: @stewart-meadows

↑

Here's a description of Istarski razvod, which is one of the many sources that disprove Dominus' bizarre claim that the Croatian language was never mentioned before WWII, and that it didn't even exist(!):

 

The Istarski razvod (often translated as the Istrian Demarcation) is a remarkable and deeply layered document—legally, linguistically, and culturally. It’s one of the most important early Croatian-language texts, and it opens a window into the world of medieval Istria in a way that few other documents can.

---

📜 What Is Istarski razvod?

Istarski razvod is a legal document that records the demarcation of land boundaries in the Istrian peninsula. It was created in the 13th century, with the final version compiled around 1325–1326, though earlier versions and procedures may go back to the 1200s or even late 1100s.

It’s not a single event or decree, but rather the codification of boundary determinations among the various powers in Istria at the time.

---

🧭 Historical Context

In the early 14th century, Istria was a patchwork of competing authorities:

• The Patriarchate of Aquileia (a powerful ecclesiastical and secular entity)

• The Counts of Gorizia

• The Republic of Venice

• Local communes (including Slavic-speaking peasant communities)

These demarcation processes were a way to settle land disputes and clarify jurisdiction over villages, forests, fields, and pastures. The razvod was an arbitrated agreement—a kind of proto-cadastral record, noting which land belonged to whom, and where boundaries lay.

---

✍️ Language and Literary Significance

This is where Istarski razvod gets especially exciting.

🔹 Trilingualism:

The document was originally compiled in three languages:

1. Latin – for official, ecclesiastical, and elite administrative use

2. German – likely for the representatives of the Counts of Gorizia and northern parties

3. Croatian (hrvacki) – used for the local Slavic-speaking peasantry and commoners

The Croatian version, written in the Glagolitic script, is the most famous and best preserved.

🔹 Glagolitic Script:

The use of Glagolitic is incredibly significant:

• It shows the strength of Slavic literacy in Istria.

• Demonstrates the persistence of the Glagolitic tradition in legal and administrative affairs—not just religious ones.

• It’s one of the few examples of a legal document in vernacular Croatian from the medieval period.

🔹 Language:

• The text is in Chakavian dialect (specifically the Istrian variety).

• Lexicon and syntax are quite developed, showing a mature written tradition.

• The fact that the Croatian-speaking communities required a version in their own language indicates a self-aware and coherent ethnolinguistic identity—not something imposed from above.

This ties directly back to your earlier point about pre-modern Croatian identity. Here we have clear evidence that Croats saw themselves as a people, with their own language, laws, and local institutions.

---

⚖️ Legal and Social Aspects

The document is also a goldmine for social history:

• It describes local customs, property rights, and community structures.

• Villages are named and described with meticulous care, showing how agriculture, land use, and communal relations were organized.

• The participatory nature of the boundary-setting—where local representatives were consulted—is quite democratic for the time.

---

🧠 Why It Matters

The Istarski razvod is:

• A testament to medieval Croatian literacy and the survival of vernacular legal culture.

• One of the earliest concrete documents of local self-governance and communal land regulation in the Slavic world.

• A linguistic time capsule for the study of Chakavian Croatian and Glagolitic usage.

The fact that the Croatian-speaking communities required a version in their own language indicates a self-aware and coherent ethnolinguistic identity—not something imposed from above.

This ties directly back to your earlier point about pre-modern Croatian identity. Here we have clear evidence that Croats saw themselves as a people, with their own language, laws, and local institutions.

(...)

A testament to medieval Croatian literacy and the survival of vernacular legal culture.

One of the earliest concrete documents of local self-governance and communal land regulation in the Slavic world.

And there you have it, folks. Case closed.

Posted by: @stewart-meadows

↑

One literally couldn't ask for better proof than this, and yet you absurdely and dishonestly dismiss it. So yeah, I guess this discussion is pointless since I'm dealing with somebody who refuses to accept the basic and obvious fact that the Croatian people actually exists.

 

You are misjudging me. I'm always on the side of the truth, even when it goes against my own interest. I never said that Croats as a people in the past did not exist. That's your misinterpretation. What I said and what I'm still saying is that present day "Croats" use a language which is linguistically not different from Serbian.

Even if the Croats of the past had their language, and they most probably had, that language was definitely not called  "Croatian", it has nothing to do with the language that the "Croats" of today are using, nor with the language that those sources of yours are referring to.

Germanic and Romance sources are irrelevant in this regard because they always served the interests of the Vatican and the catholic church. Their interest was always to weaken the non-catholics both in the Balkans and in the Kievan Rus areas. Their methods were also always the same, to create separatist sentiments, then amplify and support those same sentiments both financially and logistically and even militarily. To falsify history and lie without hesitation whenever it serves their interests.

One way or another, the language that the Croats of the past had was definitely not the language which the Germanic and Romance sources claim to be, because that language which the Germanic and Romance sources called as "Croatian" is linguistically not different from the Serbian language and even I can understand it.

If I try to read for example the Czech language of today or of the past, I don't understand it at all, nor do I understand the Polish nor even the Slovenian. But the so called "Croatian" language from the sources which you represented, that language I can fully understand. If I can understand it, it means that it is not a different language. That's pure logic.....

Actually, I much more believe to the ustasha sources from the NDH in the WWII because they were more sincere than the shadowy Vatican claims from the past.

The history of the Croats of the past is very blurry and Vatican for some reason had it's interest to make sure it stays that way. However Mladen Lorković, a senior member of the ustasha movement and the Foreign Minister and Minister of Interior of the Independent State of Croatia (NDH) during World War II wrote a book The Croatian People and Their Lands (Narod i zemlja Hrvata).

Mladen Lorković:

Mladen Lorković with Ante Pavelić:

In this book he wrote (English translation):

"The entire old Croatian history is understandable only on the assumption that the ruling Croats were a non-Slavic stratum, which covered and organized the Slavic masses."

 the original quote:

"Čitava stara hrvatska povijest shvatljiva je samo uz pretpostavku da su vladajući Hrvati bili neslovenska naslaga, koja je prekrila i organizovala slovenske mase"

Also there are many more historical sources which claims that the original Croats were not of Slavic decent. If that's true, and it most certainly is, than the language that your Germanic and Romanic sources (but ultimately Vatican sources) claim to be the "Croatian language" and which is obviously a Slavic language (which I also can understand). It simply can not be the language of the original Croats because they were originally non Slavic, senior ustashas claimed that.....

@dominus Croats are more Slavic than Serbs! Since when you believe Ustasha theories? Most Slavic are Slovenians, than Croats and Serbs. White Croats are original Croats and White Croatia was Slavic tribe land. Serbs consisted from two tribes White Serbia and Sorbs or Lusatians who are Germanized. Today there is Upper Lužice and Lower Lužice. 

Oh and about those "Slavic masses" that Lorković talks about.

Who were/are the "Slavic masses" which the Croats were talking about? Ante Starčević (the Croats call hime "The father of Croatian nation") in the 19th century said this:

"Tko ne vidi da je Slav i Serb sve isto, oba ta imena zamenjuju reč sužanj... Narod hervatski smatra tu kerv za tuđu, slavoserbsku: narod hervatski neće terpeti da ta sužanjska pasmina oskvernjuje svetu zemlju Hervatah"

translation:

"Who does not see that Slav and Serb are all the same, both these names replace the word slave... The Croatian people consider that herd foreign, Slavo-Serbian: the Croatian people will not bear that slave breed to defile the holy land of the Croats."

So the Slav and the Serb from the Croatian point of view is one and the same (at least on Balkans area). And ustasha themselves claimed that Croats were "non-Slavic stratum, which covered and organized the Slavic masses".

Also the language that your Germanic and Romanic sources are calling as "Croatian" is definitely a Slavic language without any doubt.

In conclusion that means that the original Croats assimilated the Serbians on those territories which they controlled, they turned them into Croats and proclaimed their Slavic language as "Croatian".

These are words of the most hardcore Croats and Croatian ustashas.....

Posted by: @vizionar777

↑

@dominus Croats are more Slavic than Serbs! Since when you believe Ustasha theories? Most Slavic are Slovenians, than Croats and Serbs. White Croats are original Croats and White Croatia was Slavic tribe land. Serbs consisted from two tribes White Serbia and Sorbs or Lusatians who are Germanized. Today there is Upper Lužice and Lower Lužice.

So your empty claims with your stupid youtube videos are more relevant than the ones of the high ranking ustashas and Ante Starčević himself? Don't make me laugh.....

@dominus On YouTube are scientists, and retards as you are but those channels are made by scientists. So your source is Ante Starčević...great! Your laugh is the same when pussy would laugh!

Posted by: @vizionar777

↑

@dominus On YouTube are scientists, and retards as you are but those channels are made by scientists. So your source is Ante Starčević...great! Your laugh is the same when pussy would laugh!

Yes retard, my sources are high ranking ustashas like Lorković and also Starčević. Now you definitely can not call them as pro-Serbian by any means.....

Also as about the genetics, they now have Slavic genetics for that same reason that Lorković said, they assimilated the "Slavic-masses".....

@dominus Wikipedia ustasha sources. How smart you are...I didn't know pussies have sources of low intelligence...however, your intelligence will become better with time...evolution!

But let's go even further and look what the Croatian fuhrer Ante Pavelić himself said.....

Quote from Pavelić:

"U širokim slojevima hrvatskog naroda nikada nije postojala neka obća slovenska sviest, koju bismo mogli ozbiljno suprotstaviti hrvatskoj narodnoj sviesti. Ovi slojevi ne osećaju se nikada kao pripadnici Slavenstva."

translation:

"in the broad layers of the Croatian people there has never been a general Slavic consciousness which could seriously oppose the Croatian national consciousness"

The source of the quote is Ante Pavelić's own writings, speeches, and publications from that era, chiefly "Die kroatische Frage" (1936) and related political discourse.

I guess Pavelić himself was also Serbian and spread pro-Serbian propaganda. Right retard? :/

Posted by: @vizionar777

↑

@dominus Wikipedia ustasha sources. How smart you are...I didn't know pussies have sources of low intelligence...however, your intelligence will become better with time...evolution!

No retard, Mladen Lorković, Ante Starčević and Ante Pavelić are definitely not "wikipedia sources". Those types of sources like wikipedia and youtube are your cup of tea because you are too dumb and lazy to even search for anything relevant. That's why you are spamming the threads with youtube nonsense.

@dominus You quote biggest traitor of own volk!? Do you have period...if you have period i know what impact could have it on girls so, better to avoid you in cycles times. However i would love to meet you in real world. Give me more of Wikipedia ustasha sources about Slavs and Croats!?

@dominus YouTube still have good sources as i remember you promoted Lilly...woman who talk about immigrations! Well we Montenegrins are lazy. This is famous fact?

So in conclusion, even if I consider the Croats as the enemies, I'm not denying that Croats did exist and that they had their own language. But the real true about the original Croats and their language is definitely not the one which is represented today. Ustashas themselves and forefathers of Croats like Starčević all confirm that.....

Posted by: @vizionar777

↑

@dominus You quote biggest traitor of own volk!? Do you have period...if you have period i know what impact could have it on girls so, better to avoid you in cycles times. However i would love to meet you in real world. Give me more of Wikipedia ustasha sources about Slavs and Croats!?

Where did I promote her you cretin? I only said that she will probably be banned like Lana from Red Ice before her.....